Issa’s new effort on Benghazi probe: a subpoena for Hillary Clinton?

posted at 10:41 am on September 19, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Politico headlines their piece on Rep. Darrell Issa’s probe into the sacking of the consulate in Benghazi as his “crusade,” a term which Issa might not entirely dislike. Refusing to take stonewalling as a final answer and armed with more information from key whistleblowers, Issa plans to hold a new round of hearings after four months of lower-key efforts to get answers from the State Department and the CIA about the circumstances that led to the deaths of four Americans:

Darrell Issa will resume hammering the White House on Benghazi on Thursday after four months of relative silence on the subject, as his committee interrogates two of the chief independent investigators of the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic outposts in Libya.

Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will basically investigate the independent investigation by the Accountability Review Board. The ARB released a December report detailing the Obama administration’s response to the attacks, calling for tighter security at many embassies but stopping short of laying blame on senior officials in the State Department. …

Republicans have accused Mullen and Pickering of protecting [former Secretary of State Hillary] Clinton in their report by not citing her for any breaches of leadership. By pushing back at their report — both at the methods and the content — Republicans hope to erode one of the biggest defenses of Clinton.

“The takeaway is going to be that diplomatic security continues to be a political and policy decision,” Issa told POLITICO. “The State Department, that not providing sufficient security for the ambassador and the consulate personnel was a policy decision more than a professional security decision.”

Democrats tell Politico that the testimony of Pickering and Mullen will vindicate the ARB, but that seems unlikely. Pickering himself admitted that he only interviewed lower-level State officials because he had decided beforehand where the blame should be fixed, telling Bob Schieffer in May, “We knew where the responsibility rested.” The ARB ignored Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy, who made decisions on consulate security, but who also was a key aide to the Clintons during Bill Clinton’s presidency and during all of Hillary Clinton’s tenure at State.

Republicans are mulling whether to demand former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s return to Capitol Hill to face more tough questions about her agency’s failure to protect diplomats and security staff in Benghazi, Libya a year ago.

An aide to a high-ranking GOP member of the House Oversight and Government Affairs committee told MailOnline that the committee’s chairman, California Rep. Darrell Issa, ‘is dead serious’ about raking the likely 2016 presidential candidate over the coals in the future.

‘Look, it’s not like we’re getting great answers from the deputies and under secretaries,’ the staffer said on Wednesday. ‘So eventually you have to climb the ladder and swear Hillary in again.’

‘I’m not saying “The fish stinks from the head,” or anything like that,’ the aide cautioned. ‘Just that the committee leaders on our side want answers and they’re not going to let up.’

Issa told the Fox News Channel on Wednesday morning that his committee won’t hesitate to bring back any of the senior-level witnesses who have already testified about the September 11, 2012 terror attack on American diplomatic facilities in the eastern Libya port city.

And that includes Hillary Clinton.

‘We can certainly have Mrs. Clinton back,’ Issa told Fox. ‘We want to be respectful of her time, so getting to the facts – including people below her – first is critical.’

Issa sounds less inclined to issue a subpoena than to force Hillary back to the panel on her own volition. Undermining the ARB report will be a first step, and I’d expect that Issa has confidence in his ability to do that. Otherwise, he’d skip calling Pickering and Mullen and just focus on the CIA survivors, who will eventually get subpoenaed to testify. With the previous testimony from State Department whistleblowers in hand, Issa will next aim at Kennedy — and will be bolstered in that effort by an independent review that named Kennedy as a responsible party, unlike the ARB, a discrepancy that Issa will no doubt highlight.

If they build the case all the way to Kennedy, that will put a lot of public pressure on Hillary to make an appearance at the Oversight hearings, which takes the onus off of Republicans to issue a subpoena. At that point, Issa will issue a public invitation to Hillary to address the issues that have arisen from a multitude of sources about the incompetence and deceit at State during her tenure. If she refuses to appear, that’s not going to look good, regardless of whether she wants to run for office later or not. It won’t prevent Oversight from making a damning case about her leadership at State, either.

What about the Senate? Will they conduct their own investigation into Benghazi, where Democrats can control the probe? Ted Cruz offered an amendment with Pat Toomey yesterday to launch a joint effort with the House, but Barbara Boxer immediately objected (via Twitchy):

I am very disappointed that Senate Democrats just blocked my res w/ @SenTedCruz to get answers for the families of those killed in #Benghazi

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Will they conduct their own investigation into Benghazi, where Democrats can control the probe? Ted Cruz offered an amendment with Pat Toomey yesterday to launch a joint effort with the House, but Barbara Boxer immediately objected

Bitter souless withered partisan whore-politicians have to stick together. The blood wasn’t even dry in the Benghazi courtyard before the mission went from smuggling arms to protecting the thin-skinned rat (who went to bed) and the pig-in-a-pantsuit.

But if it comes to subpoenas, I’m sure Killary will have a relapse which would preclude her appearance.

From the article and it does not state who the DOS person was that hired this security firm.“DOS hired a British firm, Blue Mountain, to manage its security in Benghazi, and Blue Mountain subcontracted the job to a local jihadist militia called the February 17 Martyrs Brigade who have known Muslim Brotherhood ties.”
The Report adds that [Regional Security Officer in Libya, Eric] “Nordstrom testified at the October 11, 2012 Congressional hearings that ‘in deference to sensitivity to Libyan practice, the guards at Benghazi were unarmed’– an inexplicable practice for a place as dangerous as Benghazi.” Nordstrom also “told Congressional investigators that DOS Deputy Assistant Director for International Programs Charlene] Lamb “wanted to keep the number of U.S. security personnel in Benghazi ‘artificially low.”

That slimy broad need to be accountable for her lies and obfuscation. It was obviously Clinton and oba-mao that called off any response with an “oh well” attitude. When o’ when are we going to call out and expose these blatant liars. When the repubics get balls I guess…… never happen.

Nordstrom also “told Congressional investigators that DOS Deputy Assistant Director for International Programs Charlene] Lamb “wanted to keep the number of U.S. security personnel in Benghazi ‘artificially low.”

fourdeucer on September 19, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Issa should subpoena lamb and tell her “Well we have 4 less personnel there now so I guess you got your wish”.

Face it, we already know what the pig-in-a-pantsuit would do if given a subpoena. We saw it when Congress called her to testify how she managed to make hundreds of thousands of dollars on future commodities without any knowledge of the market……

The House Oversight Committee holds a hearing as part of its ongoing investigation into the Benghazi attack. Accountability Review Board (ARB) Chairmen testify about their group’s report on the Sept. 11, 2012 assault.

The ABR Benghazi report noted that “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.”

Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) released his own report Monday about the Benghazi attack. The report criticizes the ABR and called it a flawed investigation.

Can someone please explain to me why Republicans would be hesitant to subpoena Hillary? We don’t owe her anything- just as many Americans dislike as like her. It’s not like this would be the first time she’s been busted blatently lying!

Chaffetz coming off like a complete d*ck.
Sneeringly asks leading questions that he doesn’t allow Mullen to answer.
Mullen comes off as the dignified professional he is.
When he is allowed to get any words out, he obliterates the fiction Chaffetz is trying to spin.
That little exchange I just watched sums up the truth of this ‘investigation’ quite clearly.

Not that the goal isn’t worthy, but – GET SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED FOR F*CKS SAKE.

I get an ever-growing sense that it is nothing but a dance designed to make us think they’re doing something, not really intending to accomplish anything or hold anyone accountable, but to keep us from overrunning that place the way our founders would’ve already done.

Otherwise, he’d skip calling Pickering and Mullen and just focus on the CIA survivors,

There are also State Department survivors. There is the DS agent that was on the roof with Woods and Doherty who was wounded and is being treated at Walter Reed I believe. And there is also another State employee that was there that was told to keep their mouth shut about what happened. That SD person is dating someone that works with me. The person is afraid to lose their job. I said that she should contact Issa or any other congressman who is taking this fight on. I will have to press them to come forward.

Didn’t someone already tell us? We have to wait for a hearing how long after the attack to find out? Who gave the order and why?

Bishop on September 19, 2013 at 11:59 AM

As testimony just showed, there was no order to ‘stand down’.
But of course that won’t stop that question ‘who gave the order to stand down?’ from being asked. Might even show up on some t-shirts and coffee mugs.

Lankford of Oklahoma and Mullen having a worthwhile back&forth.
Some actual oversight on display there for a brief moment.
Nice to know some Rs are capable of such…not to mention being respectful and allowing witnesses to answer questions.

It came from AFRICOM. Since Gen. Ham was in Washington at the time meeting with the President, the acting commander gave the order. There was also a Marine FAST platoon out of EUCOM that was loading a bird ready to go out of either Germany or Italy I believe, and they were told to stand-down, too. The Marine stand-down came from EUCOM. Not sure who, though. I know this because a retired CDR guy I work with sees a JAG officer who told him about it.

AS to why, they say it was because they needed the WHOLE platoon there to assist with the wounded when they landed. They could have just left their medic, with the rest of the team flying with the CIA contingent. It is total BS that they had to stay. I would have just got on the plane and left. If they wanted to Court Martial me, so be it.

As testimony just showed, there was no order to ‘stand down’.
But of course that won’t stop that question ‘who gave the order to stand down?’ from being asked. Might even show up on some t-shirts and coffee mugs.

verbaluce on September 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Semantics. Who decided to not try and rescue our people, including telling the CIA team who had gone as far as chartering a private plane to cease and desist from even making the attempt.

As testimony just showed, there was no order to ‘stand down’.
But of course that won’t stop that question ‘who gave the order to stand down?’ from being asked. Might even show up on some t-shirts and coffee mugs.

verbaluce on September 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Interestingly, there’s already been testimony that there *was* a stand-down order given. I wonder who is lying.

This morning, in Issa’s mteenth Benghazi hearing, for the first time a letter from the parents of Amb. Stevens was read, along with letters from the other dead people’s loved ones.

I wonder if the parents of Stevens have had enough of oaf too? If they’d have come forward sooner the case w/b way further along. They used to be bleeding leftists from the Bay area, just like their Libya loving son.

The democrats don’t want to let a little thing like 4 dead Americans get in the way of the coronation of their Queen Hillary. They know she was a completely incompetent SOS, they also know she’s got a history of lying and so what good will it do do to make her come forward again? She won’t tell the truth, it’s not her nature to do so. As we all know, the whole administration started putting together a pack of lies from the very beginning, while the attack was still happening. Bring her forward, watch her lie again. Maybe Issa will catch her in more lies the democrats won’t care about.

I don’t.
Though I’d say ‘twisting the narrative to fit a rank partisan agenda’ instead of ‘lying’.

verbaluce on September 19, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Question for you:

Quite a few Americans would like to find out what “Actually”
happened at Benghazi.

There is conflicting testimony, statements, etc. spread over
half the globe at this point. You have families of those who
lost their lives that day wanting answers, but are given
nothing but a run around….

We had a “Special Procecutor” hired to spend 22 months
investigating whether a man “uttered” a woman’s name
who worked at the CIA when a Republican was in the WH.

You confront and question ANYONE here who makes a Contention.
I.E, who gave the Stand Down Order (if there was one given).

If you have no interest is ascertaining the Truth in this matter,
why do you comment on any thread dealing with Benghazi??

Hillary was the Secretary of State, whose duties included ensuring the safety of US Embassies abroad and the people who worked/lved within those Embassies/Compounds. Despite having Intel regarding potential attacks on U.S. Embassies throughout the Middle East on the anniversary of 9/11/01, 20 U.S. Embassies in the Middle East were attacked, 12 overrun. WHY were these Embassies so ill prepared?

Hillary, as Congressman Issa suggested, wants to be remembered as a highly successful and extremely competent Secretary of State, one worthy of being considered for President of the United States, and therefore she seeks to take credit for every success under her Dept. of State leadership while simultaneously attempting to separate herself from all of the failures. It is ridiculous that Hillary has not been thoroughly questioned regarding the events of 9/11/12.

For instance:

o Hillary already stated before Congress that President Obama’s foreign Policy after Kaddafi was overthrown was called ‘Low Profile’ in which the U.S. kept a very low profile, thus the name.
– Was the reason Obama wanted the U.S. to keep a low profile in Benghazi because he knew of the danger Al Qaeda posed there or was it to keep the (illegal) CIA-to-Syrian-Terrorist-Backed-Rebel Gun-Running Operation Secret?
– WHY did the State Department hire an Al Qaeda-associated militia to protect Ambassador Stevens and the Americans in Benghazi rather than provide a U.S. security detail?
– After 2 previous terrorist attacks on the Benghazi Compound why didn’t her State Dept. provide additional security?
– After the Al Qaeda-associated militia quit their job of providing protection 1 month earlier (about the same time Intel regarding possible Middle East-wide attacks on US Embassies began to surface, why didn’t her State Department either provide additional security or order Americans out of Benghazi? How much did the CIA gun-running operation influence your decision on not doing so?
– After Stevens’ many warnings and pleas for additional security why wasn’t that security given?
– Where were you throughout the nearly 10 hour Benghazi attack?
– Where was Obama throughout the entire 10 hour Benghazi attack?
– We know the WH & State Department re-wrote the CIA’s initial report 12 times….and such an action would not have been undertaken without your and Obama’s personal knowledge &/Or participation – When, where, who, and how much participation…
– You KNEW within hours that this attack was a terrorist attack, but you participated in the cover-up by also insisting initially this was over a video. WHOSE idea/plan/story was this video story, when did you 1st hear it, who convinced you to go along with it, WHY did you go along with it, especially when you knew (SHOULD have known) 19 other embassies were being / had been attacked that day?
– Who ordered the 2 ‘Stand Down’ orders to military response teams?
– Who ordered the Marines guarding the US Embassy in Cairo, 2 days prior, NOT to carry live ammo on 9/11/12 and WHY?
– WHY did the predator that responded and provide live video footage of the Benghazi attack NOT carry a missile when it was daily SOP for them to do so? Who gave the order for it NOT to carry one that day?
– Why were 20 US Embassies throughout the Middle East NOT on alert and prepared for potential attacks on the anniversary of 9/11/01?
– Did you know, as Secretary of State, that there was a huge CIA gun-running Op in Benghazi? Did that secret Op in any way impact the decision at any point to provide additional security for Ambassador Stevens OR to send or not response teams during the attack?
– Was Ambassador Stevens aware of the Op, did he have any part in over-seeing, participating in,or otherwise in this secret Op?

Hillary attempted to make the case when she debated Obama that she alone was equipped to answer that proverbial 3am phone call. She FAILED MISERABLY. On her watch the 1st US Ambassador in 30 years to be murdered in over 30 years happened, 2 other Americans were betrayed and abandoned, and 20 Embassies were attacked – 12 overrun…all on the anniversary of 9/11/01. She has questions to answer. What does it matter? Her failures cost lives and answers are needed to ensure those responsible are held accountable as well as to ensyre this never happens again.

If only.
Instead you think Obama gave an order to ‘stand down’ and this order has been kept secret since he ‘had the goods’ on Petreaus.
(Even though those ‘goods’ are now quite public.)

If you have no interest is ascertaining the Truth in this matter..

ToddPA on September 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

No. I 100% want the truth. And I want actual lessons learned from this tragedy where good men died.
But they didn’t die to serve some partisan agenda…and that what their deaths have been exploited fot.

You and many are full of words of praise for Stevens and concern for his grieving family. I welcome that.
But here’s a sad fact – if Stevens had survived, odds are he’d be at these hearings being sneered at by Chaffetz, Godwy, etc.

No. I 100% want the truth. And I want actual lessons learned from this tragedy where good men died.
But they didn’t die to serve some partisan agenda…and that what their deaths have been exploited fot.

You and many are full of words of praise for Stevens and concern for his grieving family. I welcome that.
But here’s a sad fact – if Stevens had survived, odds are he’d be at these hearings being sneered at by Chaffetz, Godwy, etc.

verbaluce on September 19, 2013 at 3:40 PM

I’ll grant you one thing.

IF Stevens had lived, and he were called to testify before Congress, and he LIED,you are right, they would be sneering
at him….so would I. Maybe, just MAYBE, these people in
Congress are getting pretty damn tired of being LIED to.

The level of penetration in the last three administrations is deep,” former FBI special agent John Guandolo said. “For this president, it even goes back to his campaign with Muslim Brotherhood folks working with him then.’

Equally alarming, he says, the group also has placed several operatives and sympathizers within the U.S. military, further threatening national security. Guandolo says the government has ID’d hundreds of Brotherhood and Hamas fronts inside the U.S. but has shut down only a few due to political pressures.